˙WPC$ …# VU:a %› 0(Ąb ÉwÕ4å ų 0J 0TZ 0^Ž 0h 0rt 0|æ 0†b 0č 1ux U,í 0d U,} U*Š B)Ķ DCü AM?Œv~ž BvĶ9 D3  0@? AOÆÎ 0D” D/Ø B˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTĀĖĀääĀĀĖ0 ,†r‰AZ‹"Arial RegularX($ĄĄ- ų -Ķ€ DŌ Ôh _#3|x 2 ˙˙0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ˙˙0Indent2ā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ˙˙0Indent3ā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ˙˙0Indent4ā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ˙˙0Indent5ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ˙˙0Indent6ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ˙˙0Indent7ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ˙˙0Indent8ā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āā0 āÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ˙˙?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ˙˙8Mac DefaultMac DefaultĶ ` °šXĶ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd€-!Cū˙ << G˙˙ Ũ ƒ!ŨŅ  ŅŅ#€d#ŅÔ€ÔÔ€ÔŨ  ŨÔ€ÔĶ  Ķō ōÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔĖĖSeptember€11,€1996ĖĖCecil€W.€CrowsonĖAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôķ ķPtPtHHÚ(˙á˙âųFG(üHHÚ(d'@ dStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃĐ ĐĐHHĐĐ  ĐĐ2ĐĐ˙˙¸æ$˙ĐĐHHĐĐĐĐĐĐĐĐ  ĐĐ ĐĐ ĐŅŅŅGenevaŅŅ ŅŅ € ŅŅ<Px–ČŅŌŌŌ443!#4ŌŌ$ *$ŌŌ$*$ŌŌ ˙KK ŌŌ  Geneva ŌŌ  Geneva ŌĶ.,ĶĶĶĶ6ĶĶ ĶßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŅMonacoŅŅ ŅŌ  BA Op Monaco ŌŌ  BA Op Monaco Ō%%%%'˙˙dxd("˙˙$ŖŖŌ  ŌŌ  Ō€-‚ƒCū˙<< C˙˙ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ō ōÚ  Ú1Ú  Úķ ķ„„'÷˙ dxdü˙P PdŨ ƒ!ŨÔ . ÔÔ€ÔĶ&€X„d&ĶŅ#€Xd#ŅÔ€ÔŨ  ŨŅ  ŅŌ € ŌŌ ° ŌŌ € ŌŌ „ ŌŅ\R AØ'\ŅŅ\R AØ'\ŅŅ€ŅŅ7€g€XXdædČ7ŅŅ  ŅŅ  ŅLINDA€PATRICIA€SHERWOOD€EVANS,ā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āPlaintiff/Appellee,ā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āAppeal€No.Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā ā01„A„01„9602„CV„00078ĖVS.ā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āWilliamson€CircuitĖŲ€€ŲŲ€€ŲßL€"#!;+'h|˛` į `€€Lßā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)ā āNo.€94044ĖDAVID€WALLING€EVANS,ā āā āā ā)Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āā ā)Ėā āDefendant/Appellant.ā āā āā ā)ĖĖĖā@ āCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĖā@ āMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEĖĖĖAPPEALED€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€WILLIAMSON€COUNTYĖAT€FRANKLIN,€TENNESSEEĖĖTHE€HONORABLE€DONALD€P.€HARRIS,€JUDGEĖĖĖĖĖDAVID€F.€GOREĖRAMSEY€B.€LEATHERS,€JR.ĖELIZABETH€L.€ALLISONĖBLACKBURN,€SLOBEY,€FREEMAN€&€HAPPELLĖ414€Union€Street,€Suite€2050ĖNationsBank€PlazaĖNashville,€Tennessee€37219Ėā āAttorneys€for€Plaintiff/AppelleeĖĖROBERT€H.€PLUMMER,€JR.Ė415€Bridge€StreetĖP.€O.€Box€1361ĖFranklin,€Tennessee€37065„1361Ėā āAttorney€for€Defendant/AppellantĖĖĖĖĖĖā@ āAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDĖā@ āAND€REMANDEDĖĖĖĖĖĖā āā āā āā āā āā āā āBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEĖĖĖCONCUR:ĖLEWIS,€J.ĖKOCH,€J.ĖĖĖĶĶĶ  Ķā@ āō ōōōÔ€„ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€Nķ ķķķÔ€XÔĖĖā āā āThe€husband€has€appealed€the€trial€courtđđs€judgment€awarding€theĪwife€a€divorce€on€the€ground€of€inappropriate€marital€conduct,€awarding€herĪpermanent€alimony,€and€awarding€her€$5,000€out€of€a€1982€gift€from€her€motherĪas€her€separate€property.€€We€modify€the€judgment€as€to€the€gift€and€the€alimony.ĖĖā@ āō ōI.ķ ķĖĖā āā āLinda€and€David€Evans€married€on€August€12,€1972.€€They€wereĪboth€employed€and€both€were€college€graduates.€€Five€years€later€their€first€sonĪwas€born.€€Mrs.€Evans€gave€up€her€employment€outside€the€home,€and€until€theÍparties€separated,€worked€for€pay€only€sporadically.€€A€second€son€was€born€fiveĪyears€after€the€first.ĖĖā āā āMr.€Evans€continued€to€work€for€the€Franklin€Special€School€DistrictĪand€earned€two€post„graduate€degrees.€€At€the€time€of€the€trial,€his€salary€wasĪ$64,000€per€year€and€he€had€$40,000€in€a€pension€plan,€which€he€could€not€drawĪuntil€he€reached€the€age€of€sixty„five.ĖĖā āā āIn€1982,€Mrs.€Evansđđ€mother€gave€her€a€gift€of€$10,000€in€cash.€€WithĪone„half€of€the€gift,€the€parties€made€a€down€payment€on€a€home€that€wasĪpurchased€in€their€joint€names.€€They€spent€the€other€$5,000€for€miscellaneousĪfamily€expenses.ĖĖā āā āIn€December€of€1992,€both€of€their€sons€died€in€an€automobileĪaccident.€€The€parties€attempted€to€cope€with€their€grief€in€different€ways.€€Mrs.ĪEvans€sought€professional€counseling,€and€asked€Mr.€Evans€to€attend€theĪcounseling€sessions€with€her.€€Mr.€Evans€chose€to€deal€with€his€grief€alone,€byĪlosing€himself€in€his€work,€and€by€withdrawing€from€social€or€sexual€intercourseĪwith€Mrs.€Evans.€€He€frequently€became€angry,€and€directed€that€anger€towardĪMrs.€Evans.€€Ultimately,€Mr.€Evans€told€Mrs.€Evans€that€they€no€longer€hadĪanything€in€common,€and€that€they€should€sell€the€house€and€go€their€separateĪways.ĖĖā āā āMrs.€Evans€sued€for€divorce,€and€Mr.€Evans€filed€a€counter„claim.€ĪBoth€alleged€inappropriate€marital€conduct.€€The€trial€judge€granted€the€divorce€toĪMrs.€Evans,€and€held€that€Mrs.€Evans€was€entitled€to€recover€$5,000€from€the€saleĪof€the€marital€home€as€her€separate€property.€€In€addition,€the€court€ordered€Mr.ĪEvans€to€pay€$1,000€per€month€as€alimony€until€Mrs.€Evansđđ€death€or€remarriage,Īor€until€Mr.€Evans€reached€sixty„five€years€of€age.€€When€Mr.€Evans€reaches€sixty„five€the€alimony€payment€will€be€reduced€to€$500€per€month€and€will€continue€(orĪresume)€even€if€Mrs.€Evans€remarries.€€The€$500€per€month€payment€was€orderedĪto€give€Mrs.€Evans€a€share€in€Mr.€Evansđđ€pension.ĖĖā@ āō ōII.ķ ķĖĖā āā āThe€authorization€for€granting€a€divorce€for€inappropriate€maritalĪconduct€is€found€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€36„4„102(a)(1)€which€provides€that€a€courtĪmay€in€its€discretion,€grant€a€divorce€from€bed€and€board€or€from€the€bonds€ofĪmatrimony€if:ĖŌ 0 ŌŌ „ ŌŌ 0 ŌŌ  ŌĶĶ(1)ā āthe€husband€or€wife€is€guilty€of€such€cruel€andĪinhuman€treatment€or€conduct€towards€the€spouse€asĪrenders€cohabitation€unsafe€and€improper€which€may€alsoĪbe€referred€to€in€pleadings€as€inappropriate€maritalĪconduct;ĖĖĖĖŌ € ŌŌ  ŌŌ € ŌŌ „ ŌĶĶā āā āNeither€party€cited€the€statute€in€its€pleadings,€nor€referred€to€it€in€itsĪbrief.€€Neither€party€cited€any€authority€for€what€it€takes€to€establish€this€ground€forĪdivorce,€or€whether€it€is€different€in€any€way€from€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment.ĖĖā āā āPerhaps€we€protest€too€much,€for€even€if€inappropriate€maritalĪconduct€is€the€same€as€cruel€and€inhuman€treatment,€we€think€the€record€sustainsĪthe€trial€judgeđđs€finding€that€Mr.€Evans€was€guilty€of€it.€€The€parties€had€beenĪthrough€a€numbing€tragedy.€€But,€Mr.€Evansđđ€reaction€was€to€withdraw€from€anyĪmeaningful€contact€with€Mrs.€Evans.€€He€rejected€her€suggestions€that€they€dealĪwith€their€grief€together.€€While€his€anger€was€completely€normal€andĪunderstandable,€to€turn€it€on€Mrs.€Evans€heaped€misery€upon€misery.€€Telling€herĪthat€they€no€longer€had€anything€in€common€and€that€they€should€go€theirĪseparate€ways€essentially€severed€the€marital€relationship€and€ended€any€chanceĪthat€they€might€aid€each€other€in€dealing€with€the€pain€caused€by€the€death€of€theirĪchildren.ĖĖā āā āCruel€and€inhuman€treatment€is€not€confined€to€acts€of€physicalĪviolence.€€ōōMeeks€v.€Meeksķķ,€27€Tenn.€App.€279,€179€S.W.2d€189€(1943).€€It€may€beĪshown€by€the€willful,€persistent€causing€of€unnecessary€suffering€in€such€a€way€asĪto€render€cohabitation€unendurable.€€ōōRussell€v.€Russellķķ,€3€Tenn.€App.€232€(1926).€ĪIt€occurs€in€subtle€ways,€and€the€trial€judgeđđs€decision€should€not€be€overturnedĪunless€there€is€a€clear€preponderance€of€evidence€to€the€contrary.€€ōōNewberry€v.ÍNewberryķķ,€493€S.W.2d€99€(Tenn.€App.€1973).€€We€are€satisfied€that€the€trial€judgeĪdid€not€err€in€granting€the€divorce€to€Mrs.€Evans.ĖĖā@ āō ōIII.ķ ķĖĖā āā āGifts€to€one€of€the€parties€in€a€marriage€are€the€separate€property€ofĪthat€party.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€36„4„121€(b)(2).€€But€separate€property€mayĪbecome€marital€property€when€the€owner€treats€it€in€such€a€way€as€to€giveĪevidence€that€he€or€she€intends€it€to€become€marital€property.€€The€change€inĪstatus€is€called€transmutation.€€ōōBatson€v.€Batsonķķ,€769€S.W.2d€849€(Tenn.€App.Ī1988).ĖĖā āā āWhere€property€is€acquired€in€the€joint€names€of€the€parties€„„€evenĪthough€purchased€with€the€separate€property€of€one€of€the€parties€„„€a€rebuttableĪpresumption€arises€that€the€party€whose€funds€were€used€in€the€purchase€made€aĪgift€to€the€marital€estate.€€ōōBarnhill€v.€Barnhillķķ,€826€S.W.2d€443€(Tenn.€App.€1991).€ĪMrs.€Evans€does€not€cite€any€evidence€in€her€brief€to€overcome€the€presumption,Īand€we€fail€to€find€any€such€evidence€in€the€record.€€Therefore,€the€money€derivedĪfrom€the€sale€of€the€marital€home€should€be€evenly€divided.ĖĖā@ āō ōIV.Ėā@ āa.€€Alimonyķ ķĖĖā āā āMr.€Evans€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€Mrs.€EvansĪlong€term€alimony.€€We€note€that€the€alimony€award€was€in€two€parts.€€Mr.€EvansĪwas€ordered€to€pay€Mrs.€Evans€$1,000€per€month€until€her€death€or€remarriage€„„Īor€until€Mr.€Evans€reaches€the€age€of€sixty„five.€€At€that€point€Mr.€Evansđđ€obligationĪwould€be€reduced€to€$500€per€month.€€The€$500€payments€were€characterized€byĪthe€trial€judge€as€a€division€of€Mr.€Evansđđ€retirement€account,€which€the€court€hadĪnot€previously€divided.€€(We€note€also€that€the€final€decree€provides€that€in€theĪevent€of€Mr.€Evansđđ€death,€Mrs.€Evans€will€receive€one„half€of€the€lump€sum€in€Mr.ĪEvansđđ€account.)ĖĖā āā āThe€legislature€has€made€it€clear€that€if€possible€the€dependency€ofĪone€spouse€on€the€other€be€eliminated€and€both€parties€be€relieved€of€theĪimpediments€incident€to€the€dissolved€marriage.€€See€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€36„5„101(d);€ōōSelf€v.€Selfķķ,€861€S.W.2d€360€(Tenn.€1993).€€đ đLong„term€support€andĪmaintenance€is€appropriate€only€where€there€is€relative€economic€disadvantageĪand€rehabilitation€of€the€disadvantaged€party€is€not€feasible.đđ€€ōōId.ķ퀀861€S.W.2d€atĪ361.ĖĖā āā āIn€this€case€the€trial€judge€did€not€make€a€finding€that€Mrs.€EvansĪcould€not€be€rehabilitated.€€ōōSee€Aaron€v.€Aaronķķ,€909€S.W.2d€408€(Tenn.€1995).€ĪWe€think€the€record€preponderates€in€favor€of€a€finding€that€rehabilitation€isÍfeasible.€€Mrs.€Evans€has€a€college€degree€and€was€gainfully€employed€until€theĪbirth€of€her€children.€€She€plans€to€continue€her€education.€€She€is€now€employed.€ĪTherefore,€we€think€the€alimony€award€should€be€modified€to€provide€that€Mr.ĪEvans€pay€Mrs.€Evans€$1,000€per€month€for€a€period€of€five€years,€or€until€herĪdeath€or€remarriage.ĖĖā@ āō ōb.€€The€Retirement€Accountķ ķĖĖā āā āThe€trial€judge€chose€to€deal€with€Mr.€Evansđđ€retirement€account€byĪmaking€it€a€part€of€the€alimony€award.€€The€final€decree€provided€that€Mrs.€EvansĪbe€paid€$500€per€month€when€the€funds€become€available€to€Mr.€Evans€(whenĪMr.€Evans€reaches€age€sixty„five),€provided€Mrs.€Evans€is€still€living.€€If€Mr.€EvansĪdies€before€reaching€age€sixty„five,€Mrs.€Evans€will€be€entitled€to€one„half€of€theĪfunds€in€the€account.ĖĖā āā āThe€present€value€of€a€vested€retirement€account€is€clearly€maritalĪproperty.€€See€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€đđ€36„4„121(b)(1).€€ōōBatson€v.€Batsonķķ,€769€S.W.2dĪ849€(Tenn.€App.€1988),€ōōTowner€v.€Townerķķ,€858€S.W.2d€888€(Tenn.€1993).€€ButĪpension€rights€must€be€valued€as€of€a€date€as€near€as€possible€to€the€divorce.€ĪōōKendrick€v.€Kendrickķķ,€902€S.W.2d€918€(Tenn.€App.€1994).ĖĖā āā āWe€think€the€trial€judgeđđs€order€is€defective€for€three€reasons.€€First,ĪMrs.€Evansđđ€enjoyment€of€the€benefits€from€the€retirement€account€is€madeĪcontingent€on€her€surviving€until€Mr.€Evansđđ€sixty„fifth€birthday€and€beyond.€€(Also,Īthe€amount€of€the€benefit€to€her€may€be€affected€by€how€long€Mr.€Evans€lives.€ĪWhat€would€happen€to€her€benefits€if€Mr.€Evans€died€one€month€after€beginning€toĪdraw€his€pension?)€Second,€the€order€gives€Mrs.€Evans€the€benefit€ofĪcontributions€made€by€Mr.€Evans€after€the€divorce.€€If€Mr.€Evans€died€one€monthĪbefore€he€was€set€to€retire,€Mrs.€Evans€would€receive€one„half€of€the€retirementĪaccount,€including€the€contributions€made€by€Mr.€Evans€in€the€nearly€two€decadesĪafter€the€marriage€ended.ĖĖā āā āThird,€we€cannot€tell€from€the€record€whether€Mr.€Evansđđ€retirementĪbenefits€were€vested€or€non„vested.€€In€ōōKendrick€v.€Kendrickķķ,€902€S.W.2d€918Ī(Tenn.€App.€1994),€this€court€discussed€two€ways€to€handle€pension€interests.€ĪOne€is€the€present€value€method,€and€the€other€is€the€retainedĪjurisdiction/deferred€distribution€method.€€In€ōōKendrickķķ€we€chose€the€latter€becauseĪthe€military€pension€was€non„vested.€€But€the€propriety€of€including€non„vestedĪpension€interests€in€the€marital€estate€remains€the€subject€of€some€doubt€becauseĪthe€Supreme€Court€granted€permission€to€appeal€in€ōōCohen€v.€Cohenķķ,€No.€01„A„01„9410„CV„00464€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May€10,€1995)€solely€to€address€this€question.ĖĖā āā āIn€this€case€it€seems€to€us€that€even€if€the€pension€is€non„vested,€theĪpresent€value€method€is€preferable€because€it€will€give€Mrs.€Evans€the€benefit€ofĪthe€asset€immediately,€while€freeing€Mr.€Evansđđ€pension€from€any€encumbrances,Īand€both€parties€from€further€entanglements€with€each€other.ĖĖā āā āOur€disposition€of€this€issue€requires€that€the€case€be€remanded€toĪthe€trial€court€for€a€determination€of€whether€Mr.€Evansđđ€pension€is€vested€or€non„vested.€€Then,€the€court€should€find€the€value€of€Mr.€Evansđđ€retirement€account€asĪof€the€date€of€the€divorce€(taking€into€account€that€the€benefits€may€not€vest€until€aĪlater€date€and€will€not€be€available€until€he€reaches€age€sixty„five).€€Then€one„halfĪof€that€value€can€be€awarded€to€Mrs.€Evans.€€The€courtđđs€division€of€the€otherĪmarital€property€provides€Mr.€Evans€with€the€funds€to€pay€Mrs.€Evans,€or€the€courtĪmay€allow€him€to€pay€in€installments.€€Once€Mrs.€Evans€has€been€fullyĪcompensated,€she€will€no€longer€have€any€interest€in€Mr.€Evansđđ€pension.ĖĖā āā āThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€to€provide€that€the€alimonyĪwill€be€paid€for€a€definite€term€of€five€years€and€that€Mr.€Evansđđ€pension€will€beĪdivided€as€Ėprovided€herein.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€Circuit€Court€of€WilliamsonĪCounty€for€further€proceedings€in€accordance€with€this€opinion.€€Tax€the€costs€onĪappeal€to€the€parties€equally.ĖĖĶĶĖĖā āā āā āā āā āā ā________________________________Ėā āā āā āā āā āā āBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEĖĖĖĖCONCUR:ĖĖĖĖĖ_______________________________ĖSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEĖĖĖĖĖ_______________________________ĖWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEĖĖĮŅ ° ŅŅ  ŅÔ% € Ô